The Chinese Solar Machine Layer by Layer Fire in the Library The Mystery Behind Anesthesia
(Page 2 of 2)
The researchers are also collaborating with ExxonMobil to overhaul algal cells into living fuel factories that would efficiently convert carbon dioxide into hydrocarbons that could be processed in refineries. "There are no existing cells that we've been able to find that do that process efficiently enough to make it economically viable," says Venter.
Other potential applications include designing synthetic microbes that could purify water or manufacture chemicals or food ingredients. "I predict within a decade, any cell that's used in industrial processes will be made synthetically," says Venter.
To this end, the researchers plan to eventually develop a kind of universal recipient cell that could "boot up" any donor genome. The transplant process has proven to be the most technically challenging aspect of building a synthetic cell, says Venter, and it would be ideal to avoid a new round of troubleshooting for each new system that is developed.
For now, says Voigt, the biggest hurdle in realizing the potential of synthetic genomics is the gap between our ability to synthesize DNA and our ability to design it. "That's going to be the next generation of research," he says. "The technology around building DNA is mature now, and it's going to be the toolbox to design it that comes next."
Beyond practical applications, Venter also hopes that synthetic cells will help elucidate the basics workings of life, perhaps allowing researchers to decipher exactly what every component of a bacterial cell does. Although the genomes of countless organisms have now been sequenced, says Venter, we still don't fully understand how even the simplest life forms function. "We want to try to make one of these cells the best-understood cellular system in biology," he says.
Venter also points to what the cells--powered by genomes made in a lab from four bottles of chemicals, based on instructions stored on a computer--reveal about what life is. "This is as much a philosophical as a technological advance," he says. "The notion that this is possible means bacterial cells are software-driven biological machines. If you change the software, you build a new machine. I'm still amazed by it."
The development highlights the fact that we are moving out of the era where cells and DNA must be physically transferred from one location to another, says Voigt, to one in which biology is an information science. It would now be possible to sequence an organism's genome in San Francisco, e-mail the sequence across the country, and bring that organism into being in a lab in Maryland. "Just the information alone is able to reconstruct that organism and convert it back into life," says Voigt.
Synthetic Genome and Synthetic Life?
I have problems with both of these terms as they are used here. First, I don't believe this qualifies as a synthetic genome. In my mind a synthetic genome would be one designed by humans, not merely a copy of an existing natural genome with some graffiti added. (The names and quotes and so on.)
Also, I feel the terms synthetic life and synthetic genomes are not good to begin with. Engineered life form would be a much better description for any life form we might create. Maybe a nice acronym like HEL or HELF (Human Engineered Life, Human Engineered Life Form).
Using the word "synthetic" seems a poor choice to me and could lead to less humane treatment of engineered life forms which will likely eventually be much advanced from simple bacteria.
Calling something alive synthetic seems demeaning. Calling it engineered implies purpose.
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:
carl
2 Comments
Did Craig Venter just become an ID theorist ?
Venter was quoted as saying "The notion that this is possible means bacterial cells are software-driven biological machines. If you change the software, you build a new machine. I'm still amazed by it."
I've been following the debate between the Intelligent Design and Darwin camp for a while (Innocent bystander here), and this is the sort of thing the ID side has been arguing for a long time (i.e. software requires a designer somewhere).
Reply
chrisjmiller
63 Comments
Re: Did Craig Venter just become an ID theorist ?
Darwinian random selection processes have been used for many years to produce algorithms. It's a helpful technique in areas where the problem is not well understood, such as pattern recognition.
ID's problem is that it's not a scientific theory. If you wish to believe that the Earth was created billions of years ago (or yesterday) by a race of pan-dimensional, hyper-intelligent beings (to borrow a phrase from Douglas Adams), there are no testable predictions arising from this statement. Whatever the state of affairs in the real world, it can be said to fit with the ID hypothesis and there is no experiment I can perform that will support this view or demonstrate its falsity.
Reply
Asclaepius
53 Comments
Re: Did Craig Venter just become an ID theorist ?
any tiny baby incremental genomic steps lifting present day physicians above cannibalistic organ donor replacement practices to prolong life are refreshing and welcome....
Reply